Webster defines vigilance as "the quality of state of being vigilant; watchfulness." Vigilant is then defined as "staying watchful and alert to danger or trouble." Vigilance is certainly an important part of flying. As pilots we have the difficult task of paying attention to a variety of things simultaneously. Some are predictable, while others can be wholly unpredictable. For example, we can expect that a given aircraft in cruise configuration will cover the ground at approximately a certain rate, and so we know (from dead reckoning) about when we will get where we want to go. Other events, such as requests from ATC, or the presence of traffic can be totally unpredictable. Humans are notoriously poor at some of these tasks, reasonably good at others, and can excel at a few. We are generally poor at watching something that changes very little, but which can either suddenly change a great deal, or which will eventually reach a desired event.

The clock is such an example. Telling time is certainly simple, but watching a clock to be sure to notice exactly when the clock reaches a specific time is indeed a difficult task. It is difficult because the task is completely boring until just before the event. Therefore, people invented alarm clocks to do the job for us. We set the alarm and forget about the clock until the alarm goes off.

As the task at hand becomes more and more taxing, people generally respond by being more and more attentive. There is in essence a "vigilance power curve." We note that for very low workload tasks there is relatively little vigilance, but that as the workload increases, there is more attentiveness, but at some point a further increase in workload will cause a sudden decrement in watchfulness. We are all familiar with the phenomenon. While the shape of the curve is generally true, the position at which peak occurs and the steepness of the ascent and descent vary from person to person, and for a given person from time to time.

We know that for a beginning pilot, a full workload might just involve flying the airplane relatively straight and level. A call on the radio could be an additive task that will cause the vigilance to disintegrate. An experienced ATP might do fine flying an ILS with one engine inoperative in turbulent conditions, but might have difficulty keeping ahead of the tasks if another system's failure is suddenly added.

We are generally aware of that aspect of the curve--performance near the peak just before things fall apart. However, we often do not think about performance at the lower left of the curve when the workload is very light. Here vigilance is low even though (or in fact BECAUSE) there is little to do. This means that an experienced pilot, who finds taxiing a mundane task, might be so bored while taxiing that he/she fails to adequately pay attention to traffic and might have a taxi accident or a runway incursion simply due to lack of attention.

Beginners pay attention throughout their flights. Everything is new and interesting to them. However, experienced pilots may find more of their tasks routine, uninteresting, and apparently not worthy of their attention. We are all familiar with the types of errors that occur when reading checklists, yet we all read the words, know what they mean, and should know their importance. However, because the task is simple, repetitive, and uninteresting, we do not give it the same attention as we do to flying an ILS under poor weather conditions.

Accidents associated with poor vigilance in low workload situations can best be avoided by recognizing the problem and then paying attention. That is, the pilot must literally make a conscious effort to stay alert while doing simple tasks. While taxiing, for example, it may be helpful to continuously scan the taxiway and runway environments, to make conscious effort to hold proper flight control positions relative to the wind. By assigning oneself these little tasks as an addition (but a positive one) to the basic task of taxiing, we can make that task sufficiently challenging to keep attentive. Similar strategies work for virtually all phases of flying.

Other solutions can involve devices. Since watching the DME readout while waiting to reach an intersection is as boring as watching a clock, an annunciator which can be set for a specific DME is a useful device. In the absence of one, a stopwatch (set for the anticipated time to the fix) can be a reasonable substitute.

Such devices can be useful, but this area of man-machine interface needs careful design. Devices should help with tasks that are either inherently so complex or tiring that no human could successfully carry them out for an extended period of time. Similarly technology should find solutions for tasks that are too simple to maintain interest. However, the totality of tasks should ideally always remain sufficiently complex to render maintenance of vigilance natural and easy.

Date: Thursday, September 25, 1997, 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Location: Honolulu Flight Standards District Office, 135 Nakolo Place
Contact: Bill Padgett, CFI/ASC, 942-0779

We welcome representatives from various aviation groups to join us to discuss the 1998 calendar of events. It our intent to formulate one master schedule for all of the aviation activities. Please come and share your thoughts on this project.

Hank Bruckner, CFI/ASC, will give us the highlights of his recent trip to Oshkosh
Airshow. Bob Justman, Hawaiian Airlines pilot and owner/operator of Part 135 company, will discuss his monthly flights to the French Frigate Islands. Extended over-water safety procedures will be reviewed.

CHILDREN AND YOUTH DAY AT BISHOP MUSEUM

Mark you calendars for Sunday, October 5, 1997; 9:00 a.m. -3:00 p.m. We will have many of our Aviation Safety Counselors volunteering their time to encourage interest in the aviation field. This event will be for the whole family and the admission is FREE.

Attention all pilots, we have improved the processing of applications for Wings Awards! Upon completion of phase requirements, turn in your Wings Card to the FSDO. Please allow approximately one to two weeks for processing. Questions about the awards can be addressed to Renee Chock at 837-8350. The current Advisory Circular for the Wings Program is 61.91H.

PHASE I
Brian Finn
Jeffrey S. Hill

PHASE V
Richard L. Rohrer II

PHASE VI
Sara Maher